PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CMDT vs. GRN
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

CMDT vs. GRN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

CMDT vs. GRN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
16.85%12.78%6.93%5.50%
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
-14.32%20.33%-7.34%-11.86%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CMDT achieves a 16.85% return, which is significantly higher than GRN's -14.32% return.


CMDT

1D
-0.09%
1M
6.54%
YTD
16.85%
6M
19.40%
1Y
23.79%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GRN

1D
2.15%
1M
6.21%
YTD
-14.32%
6M
-3.77%
1Y
6.98%
3Y*
-6.38%
5Y*
11.84%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


CMDT vs. GRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CMDT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than GRN's 0.75% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

CMDT vs. GRN — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CMDT
CMDT Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
CMDT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CMDT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
CMDT Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
CMDT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
CMDT Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

GRN
GRN Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
GRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRN Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
GRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRN Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CMDT vs. GRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) and iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


CMDTGRNDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.81

0.24

+1.57

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.45

0.52

+1.92

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.07

+0.26

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.63

0.32

+2.31

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.67

1.02

+8.65

CMDT vs. GRN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CMDT Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is higher than the GRN Sharpe Ratio of 0.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CMDT and GRN, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CMDTGRNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.81

0.24

+1.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.22

0.40

+0.82

Correlation

The correlation between CMDT and GRN is 0.07, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

CMDT vs. GRN - Dividend Comparison

CMDT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, while GRN has not paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM202520242023
CMDT
PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund
2.59%3.04%8.80%2.71%
GRN
iPath Series B Carbon ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

CMDT vs. GRN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CMDT drawdown since its inception was -9.69%, smaller than the maximum GRN drawdown of -47.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CMDT and GRN.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


CMDTGRNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.69%

-47.96%

+38.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.21%

-30.39%

+21.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-47.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.83%

-24.75%

+23.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.78%

-17.38%

+14.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.51%

9.53%

-7.02%

Volatility

CMDT vs. GRN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PIMCO Commodity Strategy Active Exchange-Traded Fund (CMDT) is 5.26%, while iPath Series B Carbon ETN (GRN) has a volatility of 12.15%. This indicates that CMDT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


CMDTGRNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.26%

12.15%

-6.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.59%

23.75%

-14.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.22%

29.70%

-16.48%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.12%

40.23%

-28.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.12%

42.32%

-30.20%